Ref whinging post

by GavinDragon Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:22 am

Can't believe I havent read more posts about the absolute inconsistency with which the game was refereed. No doubt this is because the lions won. However I feel it was one of the most inconsistent performances I have seen, a couple of points I would like to make:

In the first 7 minutes of the game he penalises Lions players at the breakdown. Regardless of whether you feel they were penalties or not (which I feel Bod's wasnt) he then warns Warburton despite both penalties being just inside the lions half and not exactly 'in the red zone'. Then later in the half the wallabies are pinged three times at the breakdown including the third being on the 5m line with the lions in a try scoring opportunity. Many felt it was a yellow card situation, does the ref even talk to the wallabies? No.
He penalised the lions alot for going off their feet at the breakdown. However look back at the ruck which lead to the tap penalty for Aussie first try. Stephen Moore comes in from the side and straight off his feet and yet it is the lions who are penalised. In the second half the lions counter ruck with heaslip coming through the gate unopposed and on hist feet and again are pinged.
The third is slightly more subjective and perhaps because I was so enraged by his reffing that I was looking for it but Australia were given an age at the breakdown, both to win the ruck and to do something with the ball. I would love to time how long the aussies were giving when there were isolated compared to the lions. Because it sure as hell felt like he was quicker to blow up on the lions than the aussie.

Look I dont mind if a ref is wrong during the match. It is a hard job but at least if a ref is consistent it will level out for both sides however the three points I feel point to areas where he wasnt consistent and for me it ruined the game.

Role on a time when refs from other parts of the world i.e US, Canada Argentina are given higher profile games as only then can we have a neutral ref. And by that I dont mean that yesterdays ref was biased because he was from NZ, but rather because he is a s15 ref and likewise his 'style' would suit the wallabies, as no doubt you would imagine/argue a French ref would suit the lions.

by fa0019 Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:41 am

Personally I didn't think he was biased but remember he's a SH ref and is used to SH rugby. AUS play that style so they know what is and what isn't allowed. AUS are a very streetwise side, always have been.

I did think his decisions were bizarre though. I know the rules but I don't understand how the breakdown is officiated these days.... The same with scrums.

Next week is romain poite no? Likes his scrums and a NH ref, more likely we will be less under pressure for the 2nd test.

In the end we won the game by the skin of our teeth and had we lost it wouldn't have been because of the ref... We are a far better than that display and without north it would have been Durban 09 all over again.

The ref is probably about a dozen points down from why we struggled to get over the victory line.

by GavinDragon Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:46 am

fa0019 wrote:Personally I didn't think he was biased but remember he's a SH ref and is used to SH rugby. AUS play that style so they know what is and what isn't allowed. AUS are a very streetwise side, always have been.

I did think his decisions were bizarre though. I know the rules but I don't understand how the breakdown is officiated these days.... The same with scrums.

Next week is romain poite no? Likes his scrums and a NH ref, more likely we will be less under pressure for the 2nd test.

In the end we won the game by the skin of our teeth and had we lost it wouldn't have been because of the ref... We are a far better than that display and without north it would have been Durban 09 all over again.

The ref is probably about a dozen points down from why we struggled to get over the victory line.

I am not saying he was biased I am saying he was inconsistent and completely ruined my enjoyment of the game.

I only put this on here because we won. If we had of lost I wouldn't have said anything as it would have just come across as sour grapes etc

by Seagultaf Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:47 am

I agree that the Ref was poor, he did not allow the Lions to contest the breakdown which destroyed their momentum. At times it was like watching Rugby League!

The video Ref decision on the second Oz try also surprised me, the ball went forward but because the passers hands were pointing backwards it wasn't a forward pass.

IRB Law 12 Definition of a Forward Pass:

"A throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward. ‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line."

by Guest Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:51 am

Seagultaf, that's because under the laws of physics ANY pass sideways or back made while running forward at speed will actually travel forward due to momentum. Youtube it. There's some good videos on it. A good one is by the Aussie RU. If they didn't do the hands backwards thing then pretty much ever single flat or slightly backwards pass would actually be classed as a forward pass as they all travel forwards as they travel.

by Guest Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:53 am

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=box08lq9ylg

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RgMlDy2jP9s

by Guest Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:56 am

The real question is 'did the ball go forward or did the player throw the ball forward'. Big difference, hence the direction of the hands ruling.

Edit: just to clarify IMO the try was fine as the hands were directioned backwards. It is physically impossible for the hands to aim backwards but to throw the ball forward, so that ruling/directive is a sound one IMO.

by HongKongCherry Sun Jun 23, 2013 9:28 am

I thought the ref was pretty awful, but in general he was consistent with his awfulness! The decision not to bin O'Connell for killing the ball was farcical, but only fair when you consider what he let go earlier in the game. The IRB really need to look to sort this out; there aren't 2 different rule books yet the hemispheres play to 2 different rule books. You then get games between countries being heavily influenced by the origin of the ref, rather than the ability of the teams.

by Mr Fishpaste Sun Jun 23, 2013 9:32 am

The real question is: what was the last post-match thread where someone didn't accuse the ref of bias/inconsistency/incompetence? Clearly the IRB needs to fire all its refs and send out application forms on 606

by GavinDragon Sun Jun 23, 2013 11:08 am

Mr Fishpaste wrote:The real question is: what was the last post-match thread where someone didn't accuse the ref of bias/inconsistency/incompetence? Clearly the IRB needs to fire all its refs and send out application forms on 606

great idea Very Happy

by GloriousEmpire Sun Jun 23, 2013 11:12 am

GavinDragon wrote:Can't believe I havent read more posts about the absolute inconsistency with which the game was refereed. No doubt this is because the lions won. However I feel it was one of the most inconsistent performances I have seen, a couple of points I would like to make:

In the first 7 minutes of the game he penalises Lions players at the breakdown. Regardless of whether you feel they were penalties or not (which I feel Bod's wasnt) he then warns Warburton despite both penalties being just inside the lions half and not exactly 'in the red zone'. Then later in the half the wallabies are pinged three times at the breakdown including the third being on the 5m line with the lions in a try scoring opportunity. Many felt it was a yellow card situation, does the ref even talk to the wallabies? No.
He penalised the lions alot for going off their feet at the breakdown. However look back at the ruck which lead to the tap penalty for Aussie first try. Stephen Moore comes in from the side and straight off his feet and yet it is the lions who are penalised. In the second half the lions counter ruck with heaslip coming through the gate unopposed and on hist feet and again are pinged.
The third is slightly more subjective and perhaps because I was so enraged by his reffing that I was looking for it but Australia were given an age at the breakdown, both to win the ruck and to do something with the ball. I would love to time how long the aussies were giving when there were isolated compared to the lions. Because it sure as hell felt like he was quicker to blow up on the lions than the aussie.

Look I dont mind if a ref is wrong during the match. It is a hard job but at least if a ref is consistent it will level out for both sides however the three points I feel point to areas where he wasnt consistent and for me it ruined the game.

Role on a time when refs from other parts of the world i.e US, Canada Argentina are given higher profile games as only then can we have a neutral ref. And by that I dont mean that yesterdays ref was biased because he was from NZ, but rather because he is a s15 ref and likewise his 'style' would suit the wallabies, as no doubt you would imagine/argue a French ref would suit the lions.

There was great consistency in that when the Lions killed the ball on their own line there was also no yellow card.

Of course there is a difference between the way SH referees interpret the breakdown than NH referees. Everybody knows this. It was the Lions responsibility to learn this and adapt accordingly. Conversely the entire NZ v France series was controlled by NH referees who allowed all bloody murder at the breakdown which favoured France massively. Especially Nigel Owen's performance yesterday in which I beleive he issued just two breakdown penalties.

You can't say this is "inconsistency" it is exactly consistency. The game in the SH is faster and the rucks are cleaner. If the Lions didn't figure this out and exhibit appropriate discipline then they only have themselves to blame.

Agree with Hong Kong Cherry. The IRB need to sort this out, but making the NH refs fall into line! Run

by Guest Sun Jun 23, 2013 12:50 pm

GE, what a lot of people dislike is the difference between the two hemispheres in the first place. There shouldn't be a difference in interpretation at all. It should just be one set of rules. If that set of rules and interpretations is decided to be the SH ones rom now on then so be it. But 4 or 5 of the jackal penalties yesterday, given against the Lions, would have been successful turnovers in the 6N. How can that be? It's massive.

What I don't understand is how or why there is some magical transformation in the rule book as soon as you cross the equator. Is it official (as in IRB sanctioned, like the ELVs)?

by ChequeredJersey Sun Jun 23, 2013 1:28 pm

Seagultaf wrote:I agree that the Ref was poor, he did not allow the Lions to contest the breakdown which destroyed their momentum. At times it was like watching Rugby League!

The video Ref decision on the second Oz try also surprised me, the ball went forward but because the passers hands were pointing backwards it wasn't a forward pass.

IRB Law 12 Definition of a Forward Pass:

"A throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward. ‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line."

That's the case in all rugby now. The pass was also flat anyway. It's to do with momentum or something

by GavinDragon Sun Jun 23, 2013 1:46 pm

im watching the game back on youtube with aussie comentators. The penalty which heaslip gave away on 61minutes....you know the one where he joined the ruck at the back foot, came through the gate and cleaned genia out while staying on his feet but got penalised.....well the aussie comentators applauded genia for shouting to pillock 'im the half back'

'im the half back'

im sorry will someone from the SH fill me in, or is there a new interpretation which you guys use where half backs are not allowed to be counter rucked against?

pathetic

by HammerofThunor Sun Jun 23, 2013 1:50 pm

Heaslip drove over the ball...fine. But then he carried on and pushed he scrum half out of the way. That you can't do.

Also TMO may ONLY judge forward passes based on the movement of the hands. That was part of the IRB ruling

by ChequeredJersey Sun Jun 23, 2013 1:53 pm

Genia is not part of the ruck as a Halfback and thus clearing him out before actually securing the ball is to all intents and purposes a tackle off the ball?

by ChequeredJersey Sun Jun 23, 2013 1:56 pm

Also, at what point was Pollock allowing any counterrucking?

by ChequeredJersey Sun Jun 23, 2013 1:56 pm

And if you aren't bound to another player, you aren't rucking

by ChequeredJersey Sun Jun 23, 2013 1:57 pm

That's in the laws

by GavinDragon Sun Jun 23, 2013 1:57 pm

i know when a ruck is won you are not allowed to lean over and pull/drag a half back into the ruck

however surely that was just legal counter rucking, it looked like genia had hands on regardless,

by GavinDragon Sun Jun 23, 2013 2:00 pm

also if genia wasnot part of the ruck then was there a ruck at all? heaslip was the only lions player on his feet, for it to be considered a ruck do you not need one player from each side on their feet contesting over a tackled player/s, so again if genia wasnt part of the ruck there was no ruck and heaslip could just go in from any angle as there is no offside line and pick the ball up

by ChequeredJersey Sun Jun 23, 2013 2:00 pm

Nha, Genia never touched it. What SHOULD have been a Lions penalty though was the Aussie diving into the ruck completely off his feet a second before

by ChequeredJersey Sun Jun 23, 2013 2:01 pm

GavinDragon wrote:also if genia wasnot part of the ruck then was there a ruck at all? heaslip was the only lions player on his feet, for it to be considered a ruck do you not need one player from each side on their feet contesting over a tackled player/s, so again if genia wasnt part of the ruck there was no ruck and heaslip could just go in from any angle as there is no offside line and pick the ball up

That's the point. He didn't try and pick the ball up, he tackled Genia off the ball to all intents and purposes

by GavinDragon Sun Jun 23, 2013 2:03 pm

ah rite ok, i can accept that to a degree but that wouldnt be given too many times in the nh, would be considered good counter rucking

by ChequeredJersey Sun Jun 23, 2013 2:05 pm

It should have been a Lions penalty anyway though, looking at it, Paul dives straight into the ruck off his feet

by glamorganalun Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:18 pm

ChequeredJersey wrote:It should have been a Lions penalty anyway though, looking at it, Paul dives straight into the ruck off his feet

That happened throughout the game but the Lions got pinged for doing the same, the ref was consistent

by Seagultaf Sun Jun 23, 2013 10:16 pm

ChequeredJersey wrote:
Seagultaf wrote:I agree that the Ref was poor, he did not allow the Lions to contest the breakdown which destroyed their momentum. At times it was like watching Rugby League!

The video Ref decision on the second Oz try also surprised me, the ball went forward but because the passers hands were pointing backwards it wasn't a forward pass.

IRB Law 12 Definition of a Forward Pass:

"A throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward. ‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line."

That's the case in all rugby now. The pass was also flat anyway. It's to do with momentum or something

The definition quoted word for word from the IRB site. The only exception stated is:

Exception

Bounce forward. If the ball is not thrown forward but it hits a player or the ground and bounces forward, this is not a throw forward.

There are 2 clarifications with respect to Law 12, one refers to ripping of the ball from a players hands and the other to the ability to take a quick throw when a ball is knocked forward into touch. There is no mention of direction of hands, flat passes, momentum or laws of physics.

So, if the ball travels towards the opposing team's dead ball line (as on this occasion it did) and does not hit a player or the ground, is it a forward pass?

by Mr Fishpaste Sun Jun 23, 2013 10:24 pm

Though momentum is not mentioned, it has to be taken into account because the alternative is ridiculous: virtually the only way anyone in full sprint would be able to pass a ball that actually travels backwards through space is if they passed it directly behind them (ie in the opposite direction to the direction of their running - and they'd have to pass the ball at a speed faster than they are running). If the sprinter passes in any other direction, the ball will be carried forward. Hence, the IRB play the 'angle out of the passer's hands' interpretation. If they wanted to ensure that no pass ever travelled forward, they'd have to rule that a sprinting rugby player must stop before he passes!

by HammerofThunor Sun Jun 23, 2013 10:30 pm

Mr Fishpaste wrote:Though momentum is not mentioned, it has to be taken into account because the alternative is ridiculous: virtually the only way anyone in full sprint would be able to pass a ball that actually travels backwards through space is if they passed it directly behind them (ie in the opposite direction to the direction of their running - and they'd have to pass the ball at a speed faster than they are running). If the sprinter passes in any other direction, the ball will be carried forward. Hence, the IRB play the 'angle out of the passer's hands' interpretation. If they wanted to ensure that no pass ever travelled forward, they'd have to rule that a sprinting rugby player must stop before he passes!

Whereas being able to run at a defensive line, throw the ball back over your head and then catch it the other side is fine. Perhaps either side of the try line.

by Mr Fishpaste Sun Jun 23, 2013 10:36 pm

HammerofThunor wrote: Whereas being able to run at a defensive line, throw the ball back over your head and then catch it the other side is fine. Perhaps either side of the try line.

Do you mean the passer catches their own pass?

by logie28 Sun Jun 23, 2013 10:49 pm

Watched it twice, ref was very poor in my opinion. Advantage not played then gives Aus very dubious pen leading to their try. Bod not allowed to compete, in fact no one allowed to compete, at the ruck at all. Heaslip straight through the middle of ruck, pen, (you cant 'scrag' the 9 at a ruck, however you can drive over the ball which is exactly what he did) cost Lions points. The Lions last pen was also a joke, Aussie prop did nothing wrong.

But he could probably be one of the best refs around if he'd get the concept that you can compete for the ball at the breakdown into his head.

Dont think it was a forward pass for 2nd Aussie try btw, just saying...

by GloriousEmpire Sun Jun 23, 2013 11:00 pm

This thread is a massive fail - every point raised about the ref has shown he was bang on. Welcome to quality refereeing for those uninitiated !

by Metal Tiger Sun Jun 23, 2013 11:13 pm

GloriousEmpire wrote:This thread is a massive fail - every point raised about the ref has shown he was bang on. Welcome to quality refereeing for those uninitiated !

by HammerofThunor Sun Jun 23, 2013 11:37 pm

Mr Fishpaste wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote: Whereas being able to run at a defensive line, throw the ball back over your head and then catch it the other side is fine. Perhaps either side of the try line.

Do you mean the passer catches their own pass?

Yes

by Guest Sun Jun 23, 2013 11:38 pm

Metal Tiger wrote:
GloriousEmpire wrote:This thread is a massive fail - every point raised about the ref has shown he was bang on. Welcome to quality refereeing for those uninitiated !

by **profitius** Sun Jun 23, 2013 11:59 pm

Some might disagree with me but the best ref I have seen this past year has been Jaco Peyper. He is very strict at the breakdown, refing SH style but he is consistent.

by **Galted** Tue Jun 25, 2013 7:26 am

Is it too early to start whining about how the ref is favouring the Aussies in the scrum & at the breakdown in the second test?

by HammerofThunor Tue Jun 25, 2013 8:03 am

Galted wrote:Is it too early to start whining about how the ref is favouring the Aussies in the scrum & at the breakdown in the second test?

It's never too early

by GloriousEmpire Tue Jun 25, 2013 8:25 am

Craig Joubert - the people's favourite. Probably the best referee in the world. Ruthless on ball slowing tactics, keeps the game flowing, lenient on scrum technicality. In fact Australia and Australian super rugby sides particularly enjoy his interpretations - having a higher win ratio under Joubert than any other referee.

He's also a personal friend of George Smith I hear and the two while away long evenings over a few pints discussing how to get away with it at the breakdown.

And on the line NH favourites Steve Walsh.

by bsando Tue Jun 25, 2013 9:11 am

I thought the game was refereed very well.

I absolutely hate the way in which NH teams slow ball down at the breakdown, players raising their arms in the air to try and claim a penalty. It really does my head in. So when he immediately penalised BOD, who i feel was not supporting his own weight fully, I was very pleased. It allowed the game to flow better and the match was much more entertaining than if the ref had blown his whistle for a lions penalty time and time again when a players appeared to be on his feet when they were clearly not. Many refs are guilty of this I feel.

Saying that, when a player such as warburton or hooper manages to get into a ruck and grip the ball standing on their feet without a big prop to support their weight on, they deserve to be rewarded and it makes for entertaining watching too.

But I feel the NH club games are dominated with refs being influenced by hands being raised in the air by the team, usually before anything has happened... or, the whilstle being blown too quickly, usually just as a player gets his paws on the ball. quite often they're cleaned out by the other teams forwards but its too late because the whislt has been blown and a penalty awarded. It is just boring and so annoying. It also kills the battle at the rucks which I love.

This to me is a big issue with the game at the moment. The SH have it right, let play continue, don't blow the whilst pre maturely and be sceptical of teams that raise the hands in the air to influence the refs decision. A ref that shows these characteristics gets a big plus in my view as the way the breakdown is adjudicated is so crucial in a game.

by ChequeredJersey Tue Jun 25, 2013 6:06 pm

Here's an article on what Pollock has to say

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/jun/25/referee-chris-pollock-defensive-lions

by Cyril Tue Jun 25, 2013 8:18 pm

GloriousEmpire wrote:Craig Joubert - the people's favourite. Probably the best referee in the world. Ruthless on ball slowing tactics, keeps the game flowing, lenient on scrum technicality. In fact Australia and Australian super rugby sides particularly enjoy his interpretations - having a higher win ratio under Joubert than any other referee.

He's also a personal friend of George Smith I hear and the two while away long evenings over a few pints discussing how to get away with it at the breakdown.

And on the line NH favourites Steve Walsh.

Hey there

by scoi Tue Jun 25, 2013 9:47 pm

The BOD I incidents were both close calls. He could argue he was on his feet but there were so many bodies there he couldn't be completely supporting his own weight.

Heaslip clearing out Genia was interpretation of a law. You can't interfere with a half back but 2 players competing for the ball on the ground constitutes a ruck.

I still can't see why the lions got a penalty in the last minute of the first half. I can't sew why Genia tried to play a quick tap and go.

The Scrum was awful. So many early engagements from Australia after the first annihilation the Lion's played catch up and it ended up a farce.

It was not forward for try 2.

I don't think he was biased, just southern. We knew it and they should be training for it.

Genia and Warburton were both excellent at playing the ref.

With a ref more aware of scrum infringements and allowing a few more competitions at the break down it can only favour the lions.

by ChequeredJersey Tue Jun 25, 2013 9:49 pm

scoi wrote:The BOD I incidents were both close calls. He could argue he was on his feet but there were so many bodies there he couldn't be completely supporting his own weight.

Heaslip clearing out Genia was interpretation of a law. You can't interfere with a half back but 2 players competing for the ball on the ground constitutes a ruck.

I still can't see why the lions got a penalty in the last minute of the first half. I can't sew why Genia tried to play a quick tap and go.

The Scrum was awful. So many early engagements from Australia after the first annihilation the Lion's played catch up and it ended up a farce.

It was not forward for try 2.

I don't think he was biased, just southern. We knew it and they should be training for it.

Genia and Warburton were both excellent at playing the ref.

With a ref more aware of scrum infringements and allowing a few more competitions at the break down it can only favour the lions.

well, depends what side Joubert stands on. The scrum will collapse, could be Jones pulling down Robinson (to get in before Alexander collapses Mako) or could be Alexander pulling down Mako, and Joubert will award whichever he spots first

by ChequeredJersey Wed Jun 26, 2013 11:44 am

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/wallabies-v-lions-refereeing-furore/

Scott Allen's video analysis on the referee

by doctor_grey Thu Jun 27, 2013 7:02 am

All we can ask for is consistency and clear explanations. There will always be gray areas, but there does seem to be a point, especially made in that clip.

by Taylorman Thu Jun 27, 2013 7:06 am

Don't know how Joubert can be criticised is beyond me...

After all.. he is the defending World cup winning ref.. respect please...

by doctor_grey Thu Jun 27, 2013 7:08 am

Doesn't that also mean he is the World Cup losing ref???????

by Taylorman Thu Jun 27, 2013 7:11 am

Nahhh....he's our vewy vewy bestest fwend... heart

by doctor_grey Thu Jun 27, 2013 7:18 am

Oh, how cute.
Its a love thing.............

by Sponsored content